November 5, 2005
HIM 'N' HIS SHADOW:
Alito's Findings for Employers Cited as Evidence: Opponents point to the Supreme Court nominee's decisions in discrimination cases. (Henry Weinstein, November 5, 2005, LA Times)
Observers note that Alito's opinions are often narrow, turning on points that might not address the larger question in a case. And several legal scholars acknowledged that Alito had favored plaintiffs in some discrimination cases. However, they said that in general his approach in race and gender discrimination cases was unsympathetic to plaintiffs."This is a very, very conservative judge who in his dissenting opinions is overwhelmingly likely to be more conservative than the majority," said University of Chicago law professor Cass R. Sunstein, who is moderately liberal.
When Mr. Alito brushes his teeth in the morning does he see Cass Sunstein behind him in the mirror? I swear he's been quoted in the last five stories I've read -- in different papers --- about the judge. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 5, 2005 7:18 AM
And once again today on NPR Morning Edition with his now famous dissent analysis.
Posted by: Rick T. at November 5, 2005 8:36 AMWhat a sucker! I keep reading these MSM Alito stories, thinking that they are going to be about judicial qualifications, and it turns out the only complaint against Alito is that his heart is in the wrong place.
He isn't sensitive to minorities, or to women, or to whomever. Why once he even dissented because of a POINT OF EVIDENCE--the scoundrel!
Old-time law professors used to talk about "red-horse cases," by which they meant a case factually similar but legally unrelated to the issue at hand, as if one were to cite a case about theft of a red horse as precedent for a matter involving a contract to sell a red horse.
That's what's going on here. Those of us with legal training should not flatter ourselves by imagining that these distinctions are beyond the understanding of reasonable intelligent laypersons. People claiming to be law-professors are pretending to criticize Alito not for bad law, but for wrong politics. I suggest that the anti-Alito flip-flopping between the nominees' judicial and political positions be examined and challenged whenever it appears
Posted by: Lou Gots at November 5, 2005 9:43 AMCompared to other law professors.
Posted by: David Cohen at November 5, 2005 10:58 AM"People claiming to be law-professors are pretending to criticize Alito not for bad law, but for wrong politics. "
Is this what you meant to write? Don't you mean they're pretending to criticize Alito for bad law as a front for actually criticizing his politics?
Posted by: SP at November 5, 2005 1:40 PMLoved how Ann Althouse demolished Sunstein's complaints about Alito the other day. Tore him a new one. Excellent!!
And Sunstein is moderately liberal? In that case Chompsky is middle of the road!!
Posted by: dick thompson at November 5, 2005 6:41 PMMr. Thompson -- Compared to Chomsky, Sunstein is a right-winger.
Posted by: David Cohen at November 5, 2005 7:49 PMSP: I must apologize for an unneccesary opacity.
What I had intended was that the various law professors, having announced an intention to criticize Alito's legal or judicial performance disappoint by treating only with his politics. As to say, "X is a bad judge because he favors employers," without any analysis of the man's legal reasoning.
Who knows? Perhaps that is how law professors talk nowadays.
Posted by: Lou Gots at November 5, 2005 9:35 PM
David Cohen:
Compared to other law professors.
Zing!!!
Posted by: Matt Murphy at November 6, 2005 3:33 AMObviously Cass R. Sunstein is the go to guy for journalists. I heard him on NPR a few days ago and his remarks were exactly as Lou Gots describes. I wouldn't characterize Sunstein as particularly over the top since he didn't viciously attack Alito, probably much to the disappointment of the NPR interviewer.
Actually I think this nomination may go thru okay. (said opinion subject to change on a moments notice)
Posted by: h-man at November 6, 2005 3:46 AM